Retrieve FotMob football news article previews by offset, returning up to 20 items per page for paged browsing.
FotMob latest football news. Returns the global English latest-news feed. Items are article previews; the upstream response contains up to 20 items per offset. Use start_index increments of 20 to page without overlap.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| start_index | No | Zero-based news offset; defaults to 0 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.6Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does well: it discloses that items are article previews, that the feed is global/English, and that the upstream response caps at 20 items per offset with non-overlapping paging. It omits rate limits and any auth/read-only statement, but for a read-only news feed the disclosure is solid.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three short sentences, each carrying distinct information (what it is, what it returns, how to page), with the identifying statement front-loaded. No filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a single-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers content type, locale scope, item granularity, and paging adequately. The only meaningful gap is sibling disambiguation, which matters here given several fotmob news tools exist.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% (baseline 3), and the description genuinely adds on top by specifying that start_index should advance in increments of 20 to page without overlap — information the schema's 'zero-based offset; defaults to 0' does not convey.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb+resource ('latest football news') and adds scope detail ('global English latest-news feed'), which tells the agent what content it returns. However, it never distinguishes itself from the closely named siblings fotmob_news, fotmob_trending_news, or fotmob_team_news, so an agent cannot tell which feed to pick from the description alone.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives paging mechanics but no when-to-use guidance: it never says when to prefer this over fotmob_news, fotmob_trending_news, or fotmob_team_news, nor any prerequisites. Usage is only implied by the tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.